More dangerous cars!

But they are still allowed on the roads though. So if a car catches
fire and thus causes the driver to loose control and kill a cyclist,
who then is to blame? The cyclist for getting in the way? Or OTOH it
doesn't matter because not enough people have been killed by it yet?
Such are the arguments used by motorists here to justify the
continuing use of cars which are known to have dangerous faults.

"GM recalls 1.5m vehicles because of fire risk

General Motors is recalling 1.5m vehicles because of a risk of fire in
the heated washer system.

The recall affects a large range of its cars including Buicks,
Cadillacs and Chevrolets, mostly in the US.

GM said it had recalled the vehicles in 2008 in an effort to fix the
problem, but there had been new reports of "thermal incidents".

These range from minor faults to considerable melting of plastic, the
US carmaker said.

As a consequence of the problem, it was possible for the heated washer
module to ignite and for a fire to occur, the US National Highway
Safety Administration (NHSA) said..."

Mo
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/10268555.stm

--
UK Radical Campaigns.
http://www.zing.icom43.net
A driving licence is a licence to kill.

"Doug" wrote in message
...
But they are still allowed on the roads though. So if a car catches
fire and thus causes the driver to loose control and kill a cyclist,
who then is to blame?

Why do you think that cyclists and walls are more valuable than
non-cyclists?
What happens if a cyclist is driving or walking at the time?

--
Alex

Doug wrote:
But they are still allowed on the roads though. So if a car catches
fire and thus causes the driver to loose control and kill a cyclist,
who then is to blame? The cyclist for getting in the way? Or OTOH it
doesn't matter because not enough people have been killed by it yet?
Such are the arguments used by motorists here to justify the
continuing use of cars which are known to have dangerous faults.

"GM recalls 1.5m vehicles because of fire risk

General Motors is recalling 1.5m vehicles because of a risk of fire in
the heated washer system.

The recall affects a large range of its cars including Buicks,
Cadillacs and Chevrolets, mostly in the US.

GM said it had recalled the vehicles in 2008 in an effort to fix the
problem, but there had been new reports of "thermal incidents".

These range from minor faults to considerable melting of plastic, the
US carmaker said.

As a consequence of the problem, it was possible for the heated washer
module to ignite and for a fire to occur, the US National Highway
Safety Administration (NHSA) said..."

Mo
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/10268555.stm

so the reality is some melted plastic on a few cars that are not in this
country. hardly massively dangerous to anyone.

"Doug" wrote in message
...
But they are still allowed on the roads though. So if a car catches
fire and thus causes the driver to loose control and kill a cyclist,
who then is to blame?

That is a fair point - we should introduce annual tests on vehicle to ensure
they comply with some sort of roadworthy standard. That should iron out most
of these unfortunate accidents. Oh sorry, I forgot - we can't call them
accidents because Doug thinks that car drivers deliberately kill other
people!

Incidentally Doug - you still haven't replied to the other valid points that
everyone has made about the use of the word weapon.

"GT" gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying:

Incidentally Doug - you still haven't replied to the other valid points
that everyone has made about the use of the word weapon.

Duhg never replies to any post that risks becoming inconvenient to his
line of logic. This, apparently, is because he "doesn't have the time".
You'll note that my reply to his decrying of motorists "polluting" his
beloved cycling newsgroup - the in which I pointed out that he started
the vast majority of cross-posted threads, and had never once posted in
the "motorist-free" urcm group...

Strange, then, how he simultaneously finds the time to trawl all sorts of
corners of the web for other - totally unrelated - new threads to post.

On 9 June, 06:03, Doug wrote:
But they are still allowed on the roads though. So if a car catches
fire and thus causes the driver to loose control and kill a cyclist,
who then is to blame? The cyclist for getting in the way? Or OTOH it
doesn't matter because not enough people have been killed by it yet?
Such are the arguments used by motorists here to justify the
continuing use of cars which are known to have dangerous faults.

"GM recalls 1.5m vehicles because of fire risk

General Motors is recalling 1.5m vehicles because of a risk of fire in
the heated washer system.

The recall affects a large range of its cars including Buicks,
Cadillacs and Chevrolets, mostly in the US.

GM said it had recalled the vehicles in 2008 in an effort to fix the
problem, but there had been new reports of "thermal incidents".

These range from minor faults to considerable melting of plastic, the
US carmaker said.

As a consequence of the problem, it was possible for the heated washer
module to ignite and for a fire to occur, the US National Highway
Safety Administration (NHSA) said..."

Mohttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/10268555.stm

--
UK Radical Campaigns.http://www.zing.icom43.net
A driving licence is a licence to kill.

Hey Doug, I agree with you totally. These electrical fires are a
nightmare in vehicles. You really need to do your homework - people in
glass houses.....

Quote - I have just had the misfortune (or perhaps fortune) to
discover that my li-ion battery has suffered a thermal event! This
evening I noticed that the plastic casing of the battery pack had a
small dimple in it that look like it had melted a bit. On removing the
outer casing and taking a look at the cells inside I was horrified to
see that one of the cells had burnt at one corner! Thankfully the
damage was limited to just that one cell and obviously the battery
pack has not (yet) gone into a castastrophic runaway thermal breakdown
(or huge fire to you and me!).

I have of course placed the battery as far from my house as possible
(it's in the shed and it's staying there!) while I contact
electricbikesales.co.uk to claim under the 6 month warranty. I shall
keep you posted as to how things go with them. I'm not sure I want a
replacement li-ion though!

I consider myself lucky that I have discovered the problem prior to
the pack causing a fire. I had read that li-ions must be treated with
a healthy respect and thus thankfully always stored my battery outside
of the house and never left the battery charging unattended either.

Let this serve as a wake up call to all li-ion owners! Store those li-
ions outside your house when not in use. They are not house pets!


http://www.pedelecs.co.uk/forum/elec...batteries.html

On 9 June, 13:03, "GT" wrote:
"Doug" wrote in message

...

But they are still allowed on the roads though. So if a car catches
fire and thus causes the driver to loose control and kill a cyclist,
who then is to blame?

That is a fair point - we should introduce annual tests on vehicle to ensure
they comply with some sort of roadworthy standard. That should iron out most
of these unfortunate accidents. Oh sorry, I forgot - we can't call them
accidents because Doug thinks that car drivers deliberately kill other
people!

Incidentally Doug - you still haven't replied to the other valid points that
everyone has made about the use of the word weapon.

if by 'everyone' you mean the motorists here, I don't always reply
because there are too many of them responding to my posts. Also some
of them ask silly questions or are insulting, etc, which therefore
does not warrant a response.

I do hope this clarifies the matter for you.

--
UK Radical Campaigns
www.zing.icom43.net
A driving licence is a licence to kill.

Doug gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

On 9 June, 13:03, "GT" wrote:
Incidentally Doug - you still haven't replied to the other valid points
that everyone has made about the use of the word weapon.

if by 'everyone' you mean the motorists here, I don't always reply
because there are too many of them responding to my posts. Also some of
them ask silly questions or are insulting, etc, which therefore does not
warrant a response.

I do hope this clarifies the matter for you.

What did I say his reply would be...?

He's so utterly predictable.

Doug wrote:
On 9 June, 13:03, "GT" wrote:
"Doug" wrote in message

...

But they are still allowed on the roads though. So if a car catches
fire and thus causes the driver to loose control and kill a cyclist,
who then is to blame?
That is a fair point - we should introduce annual tests on vehicle to ensure
they comply with some sort of roadworthy standard. That should iron out most
of these unfortunate accidents. Oh sorry, I forgot - we can't call them
accidents because Doug thinks that car drivers deliberately kill other
people!

Incidentally Doug - you still haven't replied to the other valid points that
everyone has made about the use of the word weapon.

if by 'everyone' you mean the motorists here,

Why should he mean that, is it because you can try to separate motorists
(who might also cycle) & 'real cyclists'?

I don't always reply
because there are too many of them responding to my posts.

If you don't like people responding, don't post.

Also some
of them ask silly questions

You mean ones you can't answer.

or are insulting,

You mean like calling a group of people 'killers'?

etc, which therefore
does not warrant a response.

I do hope this clarifies the matter for you.

--
UK Radical Campaigns
www.zing.icom43.net
A driving licence is a licence to kill.


--
Tony Dragon

On Jun 9, 6:03*am, Doug wrote:
But they are still allowed on the roads though. So if a car catches
fire and thus causes the driver to loose control and kill a cyclist,
who then is to blame? The cyclist for getting in the way? Or OTOH it
doesn't matter because not enough people have been killed by it yet?
Such are the arguments used by motorists here to justify the
continuing use of cars which are known to have dangerous faults.

"GM recalls 1.5m vehicles because of fire risk

General Motors is recalling 1.5m vehicles because of a risk of fire in
the heated washer system.

The recall affects a large range of its cars including Buicks,
Cadillacs and Chevrolets, mostly in the US.

GM said it had recalled the vehicles in 2008 in an effort to fix the
problem, but there had been new reports of "thermal incidents".

These range from minor faults to considerable melting of plastic, the
US carmaker said.

As a consequence of the problem, it was possible for the heated washer
module to ignite and for a fire to occur, the US National Highway
Safety Administration (NHSA) said..."

Mohttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/10268555.stm

--
UK Radical Campaigns.http://www.zing.icom43.net
A driving licence is a licence to kill.

Do you fancy moving yourself and your electric bike to the States,
where there are plenty of Buicks, Cadillacs and Chevrolets Doug? They
seem to welcome nutters over there.